punked
-
Posts
11,943 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by punked
-
-
No, I'm saying I don't know the details of the case. When I looked into the last case you presented, there was far more to it than you were saying. I'm sure that's the case here as well. This is also extremely off topic.
Unless we are willing to fix our national language laws we should not expect Quebec to do the same. Please look into the Summerside French case they felt and won the decision based on their kids should not be in school with English kids because they are scared of assimilation.
-
You're not reading what I'm posting, so, I'm going to stop now.
I am reading what you are posting you don't like the courts interpretation of Section 23 so you refuse to respond. You are going to like it less and less as the French populations across the country fall but those students get 10 times the amount of money spent on them as other students in the region. Just like in NS where it is 4 to 1 right now French to English spending with a widening gap.
-
Again, since there was already a school, there is obviously a mitigating circumstance here.
Sure the circumstances were the interpretation of section 23 of the charter. Now the school is suing the province to put in a grade 8 class for 5 kids. Right now the school 1-7 has an enrollment of something like 50 kids. That seems like a waste to me when they could be educated in another school with a first language French teacher.
-
There are obviously some mitigating circumstances that you're leaving out.
Yep how the Supreme court interprets section 23 of the Charter. In their ruling they literally wrote French populations between 49 and 165 students get a school. Which means what? 10 kids get a program? 1 kid gets a Bus to the next province if there is no in your province? Seriously 49 kids get a school and the Supreme court has already ruled services should be offered on a sliding scale. That is a lot of money because educating the students in a school that services both the French and english populations was not enough for our Supreme court. Like I said though that is how Section 23 is written no matter how uninformed you think I am that was the ruling.
-
Yes, they get a school for the French speaking people in a reasonably sized area. The same thing happens across the country in both languages. You're wrong, it's not what you said, and it's not the same thing as making businesses operate in English. Quebec puts out all government communications only in French (except, like the case of schools, where they have to offer English services) and their official language is French. I have no problem with that at all. I don't even have a problem with the signage laws (except in the case of trademarked names, something that they're now going after and shouldn't be. I have a problem with making businesses operate in a language that may hinder their operations. Places like Bombardier and SNC would do much better if they could operate as they see fit.
Again they have a school in Summerside. The French population on the other side of the city said that their 40 kids should get their own school. PEI said 40 kids is enough for a bus to take them to that French school. Supreme court agreed 40 kids=a school. That was the decision.
-
Do you know English? Or is what you wrote in Canadian?
In English it's not "ment", it's "meant" and the Court set a "precedent", not a "president."
Typing on my phone cut me some slack. Seriously this is what you bring to the conversation? Nothing thanks.
-
Some schools in Manitoba have only 40 students, because sending students elsewhere is not feasible.
They have a French School in Summerside. PEI said 40 students ment a bus for them to go to French school, the French population said it meant they get a whole new school. The court sided with the French and set a president.
-
You have no point. You said that I was out touch then when I pointed out 60% of America supports it and maybe it is congress who is out of touch you cite congress. Hmmmm??
-
We wouldn't, and don't where that is the case now. You're misinformed.
Again in that case the French population in NS was educated in French. They however were also in school with English students and for reason they thought this to be terrible.
In PEI the supreme court ruled that 40 is a sufficient number of students to build a French school. In some places in the country that is just one classroom for an English program. That seems to me 40 students like not enough for even a program but the supreme court said PEI had to build a school. There is only so much money.
Again where is the line? The supreme court says 40 is the line for a school in Summerside or .2% of the total population. That is your line we must offer services if .2% of the population is French?
-
It's an impossible scenario.
What about 5% in todays global world that is very possible. At 5% should we being offering the French the same services?
-
Yet the assault Weapons ban won’t go through Congress nor a Democratic lead Senate…………Did you ever stop to think that maybe it’s you that is out of touch?
And the NRA certainly isn’t stopping you from purchasing a gun, in Canada or the United States.......go ahead, try it
Sure maybe it is out of touch. How is it polling? Washington post says:
A Washington Post-ABC News poll released on Monday showed 58 percent of adults and 59 percent of registered voters support a nationwide ban on the sale of assault weapons. A Pew poll released the same day showed 55 percent of Americans support a ban.
Wait maybe Congress is the ones out of touch. Which makes sense considering the house Republicans lost the national popular vote by about 1.5 million. I think maybe Obama who won his election by 4 million votes is probably in touch here.
-
So it’s the NRA’s fault that, per Vice President Biden, the Federal Government can’t regulate the laws they already have on the books…………..And you want to create more laws?
The NRA is supportive of the idea of the Federal Government enforcing the laws that they already have:
If the NRA is so supportive of "enforcing the laws they have" then why did they give their congressman of the year award to the man who made it so the ATF can never get a real head?
ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER THEN WORDS. Stop posting the words of a group who lie about simple things like if there or are not guards at the school the Presidents daughters go to? Again the words of a bunch of lairs are pretty meaningless to me. The actions however do mean something and you haven't spoken to any of them.
-
Just wanted to add:
http://www.vpc.org/aboutvpc.htm
Sour Grapes that my tax exempt organization is supported by more people and money then yours?
So you ask about how the NRA pushed in 11 states a law to give felons back their guns they refuse to read the details? Its not like I linked to a bunch of people who can't even get the facts right in a 30 second ad I cited a real source. Stop trying to change the subject do you agree or disagree with the NRA should felons get their guns back as soon as they get out of jail?
-
Care to refute it?
Yah here I will refute it. The article cites an organization I have shown as liars many times in this thread. That makes then an unreliable source how about you find a reliable one and I will entertain what they are saying ok?
-
The NRA creates and enforces laws?
They push laws they like and have huge power to do so. They have made it so the ATF will never have a real head and will only have a part time acting head so they effect the enforcement of laws yes.
Are you trying to set me up to get my talking points out so your side looks uneducated or do you just know nothing about that you are talking about?
-
2 out of 3 courts disagreed, including the highest court in the land.
Which is the way the Charter is written. People will not be happy with that if 5% of French sue the country to get their way seriously we have a huge French population and people are already not happy with it.
That point will never come. Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba, and New Brunswick aren't going anywhere.
Humor me. You believe if we have no French speakers that we should still offer all services in French?
-
But they didn't get bumped. They were getting ignored. The court said that they couldn't be ignored.
And that would fine and dandy if at the time the NS wasn't bumping most school construction projects to deal with a 30 year deficit. They weren't being treated unfair they were being treated like everyone else in that province at the time. Then NS got a huge windfall from nat gas and build schools for everyone in the province. BTW all Francophone students had access to French programs but did not have their own school which they were entitled to under the charter. That is not going to fly if a population falls under a line.
I don't actually agree that there has to be a line. It's a part of Canada's culture, just a Gaelic is part of Ireland's culture.
So you think we offer service in French and English even if there are no French speakers left in the country and this you claim is why people don't trust the NDP?
-
The Government is wrong........I had this link in my email this morning:
I just spent a whole thread calling the NRA lairs with citations and no one showing me any of my sources were wrong. Then you post an article whose source is the NRA. Why am I not surprised?
-
A source?
It is quite a good read have fun.
http://www.vpc.org/studies/felons.htm
BTW again the NRA is a large part of the problem in the US because they never do what they say and what they do do most people supporting them here would not agree with. They are great at messaging but actions speak.
-
You just said that governments don't have unlimited money. That is more true in the US than it is here.
Sure and if this was about the government spending money you would have a point but they do have money and give out money to study guns. The people taking that money though are now allowed to conclude guns are part of the problem in anyway. It has nothing to do with money it has to do with the stipulations placed on that money. BTW the US government would probably take in more money if 11,000 of its citizens weren't killed every year eh?
-
No, that's not what it said. It said that they couldn't be delayed until after the other schools. They waited almost 10 years before the court case, despite a promise from the government.
Yes they said they wanted to be bumped to the top of the list even though their population is small and had services. Again the same people are sueing the NS government because it said it wasn't fair that their shrinking population got an MLA while being half the size of every other ridding in NS.
That point will never come. Preferential treatment is, after all, given to immigrants that speak either official language.
What is that point Smallc. Give me an idea where you think the line because we agree there has to be a line. BTW if Quebec changes their language laws that day will come which is why they will never change them and I don't blame them.
-
None on the weapons themselves…….Just regulations on the people that can own firearms.
Great so you think the NRA who pushed through in 11 states that felons my buy guns right out of prison is part of the problem then?
-
People can still study gun violence, just not with taxpayer dollars.
Which seems silly doesn't it? Apparently people like you keep saying the government is wrong yet you refuse to give money out to prove you are right. Why is that? BTW the government is allowed to study guns they are just not allowed to put out any reports which say guns might be the problem so they are only allowed to put out pro gun reports. That is the law not what you claim they can study guns on taxpayer dollars ONLY IF they put out pro gun reports. That is a key distinction.
-
You brought up a court case and claimed that it said something that it didn't. In fact, it said the same thing that I and the government of Nova Scotia said. Don't be dishonest.
No what that court case said was that the Francophone population of NS should be prioritized over other students in the province and their schools must be built first. Even though their schools were on a list to be built only after other more needy populations had schools built that their schools should be expedited to the front of the list. Now the same population is sueing the government of NS because that government said it was unfair that 5000 of them got an MLA while in the rest of the province 14000 people get MLA because that population is French.
There are some things above that. Providing services in a constitutionally protected language is one of them. Canada is a country of two national languages, and always has been. Other groups coming in, no matter what language they speak, operate within that framework.
At what point when there are 0 French speakers do we lose a national Language? At what point? Hopefully technology ends this argument in the future.
Should we rework the equalization payments for the provinces?
in Federal Politics in Canada
Posted
Quebec from my understanding according to the Conservatives is its own nation and has an official language French which comes with laws. Again I find it silly you expect them to change their poor language laws while we continue to practice our own.